Posted by & filed under mosomelt.

This follow-up study aims to investigate if Paramedic clinical simulation promotes stress and at what level is it helpful or harmful. Further investigation by way of qualitative feedback may well hold the answer to the experience of Paramedic clinical simulation and if the experience was harmful of provided benefit within a learning context.

Below follows a summary of key points discussed to date between all project partners (Paramedicine & CfLAT, AUT; Embodied Group, Chile) on the use of biometric feedback in Paramedic VR education (#MESH360 project). The key points represent a reflection on what we have learnt from the first prototype data collection event (August 2017), and considerations in preparation for the second biofeedback data collection event in late July 2018.


Methodology enhancement

  • Define baseline levels of stress (pre simulation biofeedback measurement / questionnaire)
  • Define baseline levels of GSR
  • Add sound stimulus (beep, crying person, etc.)
  • Record VR experience (first person point of view)
  • Ask participants if they recall external stimuli (multisensorial recall training)
  • Measure how the job simulation emotionally affects the student
  • Remplace pedal with a handheld unit (e.g. including gyroscope?). Note pedal will be replaced over time by algorithm (under development)
  • Replace GSR and Heart Rate units with a glove, to be able to measure biometric data during work with mannequin


Participant ID

  • Determine level of qualification / expertise / clinical background
  • Determine previous states potentially affecting biometric measurement, e.g. recent consumption of coffee, medicine or other similar products pre-simulation
  • Use Control participants (non-paramedicine related students / experts as control)
  • Cortisol measurement through saliva samples (good stress indicator – 30 min adjustments), to complement stress level measurements. Check for available kits


Pre-VR experience

  • Determine the level of stress/anxiety before the VR simulation. This is very important in entering a simulation process


VR experience

  • Increase duration of VR experience to homogenise the experience across participants (needed for comparison purposes). Ideal: Sequence of 2-3 VR scenarios, e.g. ambulance + scene 1 + scene 2
  • Make experience as immersive as possible (technology dependent). Level of VR technology used influences the experience
  • Adding multisensorial elements, e.g. sounds (ambulance, machinery, etc), smell, etc.


Potential pathways for research

  • Pre-simulation investigation (biometric baseline)
  • Simulation assessment
    • Check number of pedal (if used) hits and see if there are any patterns across demographic groups (eg novice vs expert). Important to consider level of stress before starting, during, and after the experience
  • Post-simulation assessment and debrief
  • Explore if wearing current version of embodied unit during simulation with mannequin is possible
  • Investigation of the cognitive influence of teamwork, e.g. measurement of crew mate during mannequin work
  • Amount of ‘appropriate’ Stress level for paramedicine students. Every student responds differently to stress (e.g. some act better under stress):
    • Look into how different lecturers deal with highly stressed students
    • Look into how students respond after 2-3 days of high stress scenarios
    • Start literature review on this topic (Stephen)
  • Investigation of external stimuli, e.g. sound, smell
  • Longitudinal study to follow the student journey over a 5-yr period determining evolution of stress levels across journey
  • Emotional triggers: how students connect with particular medical events that are familiar to them, e.g family members with similar experiences



Data Collection #2 (July 2018)

Methodological plan for upcoming event

  1. Participants to respond entry survey
  2. Participants will be presented with a 4 minutes long ‘Ambulance Ride’ VR experience, which will be divided as follows:
    1. Presentation of ‘calm’ scenario, e.g. nature scene, to smoothly introduce participants to the VR experience (15 seconds)
    2. Transition to static 360 Panorama of the back of the ambulance (45 seconds) to gain baseline data
    3. Transition to 360 video of the back of the ambulance including ambient sound (1 minute)
    4. Presentation of Job Description by Radio Call first, then by text box providing more details, followed by a Job update increasing complexity of job (radio first, then text box).
  3. Following the VR experience, the participants will move to do simulation work with the mannequin. Stressing ambient sound to be included
  4. Final debrief survey

Posted by & filed under Food for thought, mosomelt.

EDIC stands for European Democratic Intercultural Citizenship, and the +, Prof. Wiel Veugelers told us, represents or identifies Erasmus + as the main body who funds this programme. I would say instead, that the + stands for the range of different nationalities that this intensive programme gathered this year. Although there are seven universities participating and each of them invite three postgraduate students, there were eleven nationalities represented instead of seven. Colombia, Chile, Venezuela, Ghana, Greece, UK, Prague, Russia, Spain, the Netherlands and China. It seems to me that this programme has a broader impact than planned. All of the students will take their learning and insights back to their home country and influence how to teach democratic intercultural citizenship.

On the social aspect of the programme, we had plenty of time to share with our fellow students, we did a city tour in Tallinn which was stunning, we went on short trips, we sang karaoke, we danced all sorts of music including a typically Estonian dance and so we got to know each other. It was lovely to see how different some practices were but how similar we all are when it comes to the essentials. We found unity and empathy within the differences. The lived experience of our differences was the starting point for deep conversations and a springboard for learning from each other. We experienced the power of diversity and inclusion during these ten days.

The intensive programme (IP) was organised in two blocks, one at the University of Tallinn in Estonia where we had the chance to visit a comprehensive school and observe their teaching practices and the other one in Helsinki at the faculty of educational sciences. In Helsinki we travelled through time, we explored the past, stopped in the present and learned about a desirable future. As part of our adventure into the past, we visited the Helsinki City Museum and we got immersed in a classroom from the 30’s (as the picture shows). We dressed like those students, we sat in old desks and we had a teacher of the 30’s. It was fantastic!! The present, we experienced in a very traditional and famous comprehensive school that serves as the practising school to many teacher trainees from the University of Helsinki. There, different students went to different teaching sessions and we reflected as a group about our experience. The future we explored through a talk about the importance of teaching with purpose and being ethically sensitive.

We had lectures every day about democratic intercultural education all of them addressing a different dimension of such complex construct. The Netherlands started explaining what global citizenship is and the different types there are, giving particular importance to the political and critical dimension of global citizenship. Greece informed their view from a more philosophical perspective thinking about how does intercultural schools should look like and what is the ethos of such schools. What do teachers need to know so that they are mindful teachers that are capable of teaching in multicultural classrooms? The UK informed intercultural citizenship from the perspective of social justice and equity. We made critical questions about the status of refugees and different minority groups. Prague addressed the issue from the stance of the civil society and the work of NGOs as different agents of socialization. Tereza touched on different definitions (e.g. UNESCO) of citizenship education and we agreed that although there are different ways to define it, the most important thing is to have teachers agreeing on the importance of educating their students to become democratic and intercultural citizens. One difficult point is the difficulty to find common ground among teachers, the different perspectives teachers have about citizenship education, ranging from those who think that the school is not a place for politics to those who perceive citizenship education as an alpha and omega of the socialization children should get in schools. I found these positions hard to reconcile for those who have the task of educating teachers. Estonia also took the perspective of teacher trainees. Helsinki thought about the importance of teaching with purpose taking into account the different dimensions of ethical sensitivity while teaching. All of these perspectives as I see it are different dimensions of intercultural or global citizenship. The beauty of it is that all of them complemented each other, allowing us to build a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of what global citizenship is, different approaches to teaching it and how it is deeply rooted in moral values. It is incredibly enriching how different countries cope with different problems regarding democratic intercultural citizenship hence their practice is shaped by these challenges. It stroke me, in particular, the case of Prague and how they are exploring the consequences of an oppressive system whereas Greece faces critical issues regarding migrants so for them finding out what an Intercultural school looks like is highly relevant.

An issue I am concerned with is how can open education or, more general, open practice foster democratic intercultural citizenship? And I believe that in a society increasingly mediated by digital tools, having an online presence and being able to critically think about the Web and its open nature is important.

Questions such as how to cope with a variety of cultural backgrounds in one classroom? How to inform the teaching from an intercultural perspective? What to do with teacher’s own biases regarding different cultures and nationalities? How can we design activities that may advance elements of a moral compass for political participation, how near to us are institutions that address issues of social justice and human rights such as UNESCO, UNICEF, Commonwealth? where addressed during the different talks, not with the intention of finding an answer but to provide a platform for discussion and debate so that critical issues like this can be thought as a group and in so doing deepening our perspective as teacher and students interested in issues of global citizenship.

For all of us the experience, intellectually and emotionally, was life-changing! We shall keep the inspiration alive and find ways to deepen our knowledge and skills so that we can transform our daily teaching practice making democratic intercultural citizenship

P.S. A longer post with all the details of each session in on its way 😉

Posted by & filed under mosomelt.


Sublime Turbulence

‘Sublime Turbulence’ Robert Rice Flickr Attribution-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic (CC BY-ND 2.0)

I was fortunate enough to hear David Eagleman talk at Auckland’s recent Writer’s Festival.

Eagleman is a neuroscientist and writer ( and was sharing his thoughts on creativity.

This was of great interest to me as my own students in the Media and Communications in Health Promotion course are reaching the end of the semester and after rounds of presentations and cycles of formative feedback, this week they presented their creative projects. They had minimal instructions but lots of encouragement to try out new things and spend time reflecting on the learning process. Eagleman talked of ‘being fearless in the face of error’. That too often we stop at the first hurdle or see these hurdles as evidence we have failed, forgetting that with each round of trial and error essential refinements can be made. This really stayed with me, as I reflected further on our students and the invitation we gave them to try, and possibly to fail, and to reflect, and to tweak, and to try again. This seemed to be a new concept to them with many reporting that usually they hand in work and it is marked and there is not the same opportunities for these cycles of growth.

So- maybe we need to ensure that making and learning from errors is a more prominent part of the learning experience, to support students to stay with a problem, to develop grit and perseverance.

More focus on process than product.

Fully embracing the turbulence of learning.